Sixty-one percent of the audience attending the Collision Industry Conference’s (CIC) meeting in Richmond earlier this month said they faced challenges when dealing with parts sourcing and logistics.

The sentiment echoes concerns discussed by the CIC Parts and Materials Committee, according to Andrew Batenhorst, the committee’s chairman and Pacific BMW Collision Center body shop manager. 

Those on the panel said they struggle to get parts in a timely fashion or time estimates on parts when ordered, and return processes also remain challenging. They said a lack of information on platforms can cause confusion, and juggling multiple different ordering platforms required by specific manufacturers or insurance companies creates challenges as well. 

Kyle Pierce, Dorn’s Body & Paint parts manager, said the parts backlog has improved since the pandemic but still provides some challenges. He said the shop also sees issues with receiving damaged or incorrect parts. 

Michael Giarrizzo, DCR Systems Inc. CEO, noted another struggle with back-ordered parts is when there is no estimated time for arrival. 

“The return process also remains pretty challenging,” Giarrizzo said. He said it can be difficult to get a clear understanding of when a part is going to be packed up and when credits will be given for the returned part. 

The process can be time consuming and a hidden cost. 

Pierce added that this could include a damaged part that you have to properly box back up and and use the company’s preferred shipping method. It can take multiple times of contacting the company to get the credit. 

“It’s a very much hidden cost that people just don’t know it really exists,” Pierce said. 

Jason Camden, Mills Auto Group parts manager, said that as a dealer group, his largest issue is the variety of different platforms used to communicate for parts. He said different insurance companies and manufactures suggest specific platforms. 

“A lot of the issues that we face is trying to figure out what platform to use, and there’s different costs associated with each one for the dealers,” Camden said. “

Camden said his group tries to participate in every platform but there are a lot of dealerships trying to decide which platform to work with because there’s not a good return on investment. 

Standardization of the platforms could improve the process for the industry, Camden said. 

“The old school way, you would send an email with the part, with an estimate provided by the estimator from the collision repair shop or the insurance adjuster, or somebody will call you. An estimator would call you and say, ‘These are the parts that I need for this,'” Camden said. “And it almost seems like you had a better chance of getting the stuff right because you’re communicating with somebody and being able to talk about the parts that you’re going to get, versus just in an electronic order. Maybe the adjuster is not familiar with the car as much, or they’re just picking a part that may not fit that application.” 

There can be difficulty for shops when ordering parts because of a lack of information provided, Camden said. 

For example, different kinds of aluminium or sheet metal purchased from an OEM require the shop to have specific certifications. He said the dealership group typically doesn’t know if a shop is certified until after the part is ordered. 

OEMs will come back to the dealership and let them know that the shop isn’t certified, and the dealership has to notify the shop, he said. 

Pierce said that as a certified shop, he has to go onto the platform and upload documents, fill out a form, provide details such as gap measurements, and provide pictures. It can take a couple of days for an OEM to process the part, and then another couple of days to a week before there is an estimated time for arrival of the restricted parts. 

“The industry has changed a lot over the years,” Pierce said. “More and more parts are becoming restricted by more of the OEMs. More and more vehicles you run into, it’s a restricted part. It’s going to delay the process.” 

Giarrizzo said different price-matching models found on the platforms also can create “a lot of noise in the process.” 

He said selecting the best price for a part for the customer through the platforms could mean working with an unknown company and an unknown process. 

Tim Schneider, Car-Part.com executive director for Pro Marketplace, said platforms also can sometimes lack the full description on recycled parts, and information, such as grading, can be difficult for shops to decipher. 

At times, the estimating systems lack the right questions to make sure shops find the right parts, he said. For example, it might not ask if the part is for a hatchback or sedan model of a vehicle. However, he said, sometimes this information was missed with older processes as well. 

However, there are some solutions that help shops. 

Camden said their system gives shops the ability to filter parts by delivery days. He also said shops can call the company and communicate their need for a part within a certain timeframe. 

Pierce said communication is key, including with parts dealers, but also the shop technicians. 

“They know, yes, we will see all these parts in three days,” Pierce said. “Or, ‘Hey, you’re going to get everything except for this door seal that’s going to hold you up on reassembly, that’s probably a week out.'” 

Camden said most dealers have probably an 85% fill rate within two to three days. He said if shops need a part sooner, they can always communicate that they need something faster. 

Batenhorst said the current method for part ordering was defined as a “race to the bottom” multiple times during committee meetings.

“There is obviously the goal for the billpayer to want to control costs as any business does,” Batenhorst said. “But if all these competing entities are not working harmoniously, you end up with this race to the bottom, whether it’s people chasing discounts or people chasing time, whatever that looks like.” 

Schneider said this is why Car-Part.com is not set up with a filter by price. 

“We think delivery times and grading are the two most important things to sort by,” Schneider said. “You want no damaged parts, and you want something that will be delivered in the fastest time possible,” Schneider said. “We always set our system up that way. We think that’s the best. The low price part is probably not the best choice very often.” 

Pierce said ultimately, it all affects the cycle time. 

“Who ultimately gets hurt is the customer, because at the end of the day, the customer is needing the work completed, and they would like it done in a timely fashion,” Pierce said. “We’re having all these different obstacles, such as Jason mentioned, the different platforms, you’re chasing credits, you have back-ordered parts.” 

Camden said it feels like a race to the bottom due to the skinny margins dealerships make on parts because of OEM programs to match aftermarket sources. 

“Sometimes we don’t make any money as far as a dealership on the parts just to be able to get the business,” Camden said. “Being able to take care of the customer, ultimately, is the goal.” 

Danny Gredinberg, Database Enhancement Gateway administrator, challenged information providers to give buyers information about restrictive parts prior to them ordering. 

“The restrictive parts situation has been something going on for many years,” Gredinberg said. “I can recall 10-plus years ago, when we would get a vehicle towed in from another shop 95% assembled because it couldn’t get that one last part in there.” 

Barry Dorn, of Dorn’s Paint & Body, asked if the newer technology makes the parts ordering process more efficient. 

“If you use it correctly, I think it’s a better alternative,”  Camden said. “The problem is there’s so many ways to communicate that it makes it more difficult. If it was just standardized, where this is the way it’s going to be done, I think it would maybe be a little easier.”

IMAGE

Feature photo of CIC Parts and Materials Committee May 1/Teresa Moss